Why did the Justin Baldoni -Web site start with updated complaint? Legal expert explains (excluding)

Justin Baldoni and his team just launched a site in an apparent attempt to strengthen his accusations against Blake Lively – but why now?

Baldoni’s web site first appeared on Saturday, February 1st, only two days before It ends with us Costars, locked in a disputed legal battle, is scheduled to perform in a 3rd February conference intended for Hash Out Lively’s potential request for a GAG order.

As the legal expert Gregory Doll – a lawyer and partner at Doll Amir & Eley who does not represent any of the parties – telling people, Lively’s request may have been an attempt to avert Baldoni, 41, and his team from doing exactly this.

“One of the questions raised in the letter sources for Monday that seeks to prevent Baldoni’s lawyer from talking about the case in public, his declared intention to launch this particular type of website,” Doll People says after the launch of Site that links to an updated complaint filed on January 31st.

The first button on the site links to the changed version of the complaint that Baldoni and five other plaintiffs filed against Lively in response to Lively’s original archiving against him.

The second button on the newly created site, entitled “Timeline for relevant events”, is an exhibition for the changed complaint, and it is a 168-page “timeline” that uses texts, emails and several correspondents-how some not have previously been published in chronological order to paint Baldoni’s version of the stars’ conflict behind the scenes.

By publishing the changed complaint and its exhibition and the alleged messages, they contain-online in front of the performance before the trial, Baldoni and his team have made sure they will be seen by the public eye, which potentially brings Lively’s request for a gag -Order before it even has a chance to succeed in court.

“Launching it now achieves two things,” Doll explains. “One, it gets the site’s content out to the public before there is any order that prevents Baldoni’s advice from doing so; and two it can persuade the judge that there is no reason to enter any kind of gag order against Baldoni’s advice because info is already in the public space.

Never miss a story-signing you people’s free daily newsletter to keep up to date with the best what people have to offer, from celebrity news to convincing stories of human interest.

Behind the scenes conflict between It ends with us Leads was only confirmed in December 2024, when after months of online speculation about tension between them, Lively, 37, defendant Baldoni and his production company Wayfarer Studios ( It ends with us’ lead Producer Jamey Heath, Baldonis Publicist Jennifer Abel, crisis Publicist Melissa Nathan and more) who claims sexual harassment and a smear campaign launched in retaliation to talk about alleged mismatch.

Baldoni has denied the allegations of sexual harassment, and subsequently counted Lively, her husband Ryan Reynolds and their publicist Leslie Sloane as well as Sloane’s PR Company Vision Pr, Inc., on allegations of defamation and extortion.

Both cases in Lively v. Wayfarer Studios et al. Is now scheduled for trial on March 9, 2026, Judge Lewis J. Liman outlined in an order filed on Monday, January 27. Liman is the same judge that Lively’s Team asked to tackle “the appropriate behavior behavior” after Baldoni’s lawyer Bryan Freedman released footage from It ends with us Put in an attempt to refute some of Lively’s claims – and advertised plans to share evidence in support of Baldoni on a site.

In their letter to Liman, Lively and her team declared that “federal litigation should be implemented in court and in accordance with the relevant rules of professional behavior” and claimed that Freedman’s actions risked “trouble” a potential jurypool.

Another Baldoni -Attorneys, Kevin Fritz, responded in a January 23 -letter and called the move a “threats tactic” and asked Liman to reject any potential Gag Order Lively’s team can request. Fritz also argued that lively “initiated” a “media feeding madness” by allegedly delivering New York Times with a copy of her first complaint.